Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Bend, Orygun
    Posts
    417
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 115 Times in 85 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Arizona Draw changes

    A few of us have been discussing these for a few months now.

    R... 114: Note that only HALF the NR tag allotment will be available in the Bonus Pass draw. If you're a NR sitting on dbl digit points, your wait is about to get a whole lot longer. If you're getting in the game now, things will be a little brighter.


    They have been published in the meeting minutes so here you go:


    * * * * *

    9. Request to approve the Article 1 Definitions and General Provisions Five-year Rule Review
    Report, for Submission to the Governor's Regulatory Review Council (G.R.R.C.).

    Presenter: Amber Munig, Big Game Management Supervisor

    Ms. Munig provided a PowerPoint presentation to the Commission on the Five-year Rule
    Review Report for Article 1 regarding definitions and general provisions, for submission to
    G.R.R.C. A.R.S. § 41-1056 requires each state agency to review all of its rules at least once
    every five years. The Article 1 Five-year Rule Review Report is due to G.R.R.C. by January 31,
    2014. The Department presented an overview of the team's recommendations to the
    Commission at the December 6, 2013 Commission Meeting. The Commission provided input,
    which has been incorporated into the Department’s recommendations.


    PLEASE NOTE: ---> If approved by the Commission, the Department will submit the report to G.R.R.C. for their
    review. Submission of this report will not change any of the Article 1 rules; however, if the
    Department fails to submit the report by the established due date, the Commission’s Article 1
    rules will expire and no longer be in effect or enforceable. In addition to the review criteria
    prescribed under A.R.S. §41-1056, the Article 1 rule review team considered internal and external comments received during the previous five years, and processes that have changed
    since the last rulemaking.

    For all rules, the team recommends amendments designed to ensure consistency between
    Commission rules, Department processes, rule language/formatting, and to reduce the regulatory
    burden where possible. In addition, the team proposes the following substantive amendments:


    R12-4-101. Definitions

    . Define the terms “bobcat seal” and "rooster" to clarify terms referenced in Commission
    Order and increase consistency between rules and remove "by a particular hunt number"
    from the definition of "hunt area" to address inholdings.


    R12-4-104. Application Procedures for Issuance of Hunt Permit-tags by Drawing and Purchase
    of Bonus Points

    . Enable the Department to issue a license and award a bonus point when the payment
    submitted is less than required, but covers application/license fees to address customer
    comments received by the Department
    . Prohibit a person who reached the established bag limit from applying for/purchasing
    another hunt permit-tag during the same calendar year to increase consistency between
    rules
    . Stating overpayments of $1 or less will not be refunded and are considered a donation to
    the Game and Fish Fund; the refund processing costs are greater than the a refund
    . Define “Department error” as it applies to a rejected application and clarify when the
    Department may issue a hunt permit-tag or award a bonus point in order to correct the
    error to address customer comments received by the Department.


    R12-4-106. Licensing Time-frames

    . Add a time-frame for the use drugs on wildlife authorization, increase substantive review
    time-frames for licenses that require an inspection, and allow the Department to deny an
    incomplete license application when the information demonstrates the applicant is not
    eligible for the license.


    R12-4-107. Bonus Point System

    . Replace the term "season" with "computer draw" to clarify bonus point application
    requirements
    . Enable the Department to issue a license and award a bonus/loyalty point (as applicable)
    when the payment submitted is less than required, but covers application/license fees to
    address customer comments received by the Department
    . Enable the Department to remove any bonus point fraudulently obtained to increase
    consistency between Commission rules
    . Simplify the military member/bonus point reinstatement process to provide better
    customer service to address customer comments received by the Department.


    R12-4-108. Management Unit Boundaries

    . Update game management units to provide additional clarity and maintain recreational
    opportunities for the public; both hunters and outdoor recreationists to address April 2013
    Commission action item.


    R12-4-110. Posting and Access to State Land

    . Replace “licensed hunters and fishermen” with “persons legally taking wildlife” to
    address persons exempt from obtaining a license

    . Indicate a license holder who is hunting, fishing, or trapping on state land shall not
    operate motor vehicles off-road or on roads that are closed to the public, except to pick
    up lawfully taken big game animals to increase consistency between Commission rules.


    R12-4-114. Issuance of Nonpermit-tags and Hunt Permit-tags

    . Remove descriptive language relating to tag features to provide the Department greater
    flexibility in procuring nonpermit and hunt permit-tags

    . Ensure at least one tag is available in the bonus point pass to provide a chance for
    maximum bonus point applicants to be drawn to address customer comments received by
    the Department.

    Allow a person to possess the same number of hunt permit-tags as allowed for the bag
    limit of that specific genus to address customer comments received by the Department.

    . Prohibit a person who reached the bag limit for a specific genus from applying for a hunt
    permit-tag or purchasing a nonpermit-tag during the same calendar year to increase
    consistency between Commission rules

    . Allow only 50% of the hunt permit-tags available to nonresidents to be issued in the
    bonus pass of the draw. These changes are in response to customer comments received by
    the Department

    . Remove the 10% nonresident cap for javelina by hunt number to increase the odds for a
    nonresident to draw a tag, provided the increase does not affect resident participation or
    surpass the nonresident cap under A.R.S. § 17-332(A).


    R12-4-115. Supplemental Hunts and Hunter Pool

    . Define “companion tags” and allow Department to issue tags when the Commission
    establishes the associated Commission Order to increase efficiency.


    R12-4-116. Reward Payments

    . Increase reward value for antelope, bald eagles, bighorn sheep, buffalo, elk, and any
    wildlife listed as endangered or threatened wildlife from $350 to $450 and the reward
    value for bear, deer, javelina, mountain lion, and turkey from $250 to $350. Reward
    amounts were established in 1991 and have not changed since then.


    The Commission discussed the tag surrender concept and was in consensus that this could
    potentially be part of an enhanced application process through stage two of the license
    simplification process. The Commission would like to see the tag surrender concept move
    forward quickly, hopefully by next year this time, and also make sure it doesn’t get bogged down
    and delayed in the general rulemaking cycle.


    Director Voyles suggested that the authority for the Commission to have a tag surrender concept
    could be created in the rulemaking process to allow the Commission to exercise their authority
    within the fee structure. The Department needs to have some discussion and do some analytics
    on the tag surrender concept as it relates to licensing and services, and bring that back to the
    Commission.

    Jennifer Stewart, Rules and Risk Branch Chief, reminded the Commission that a tag surrender
    concept could be added later as we move through the Article 1 rulemaking process, and further
    recommended that the tag surrender concept not be added to the Article 1 report at this time.


    The Commission was in consensus.

    The Commission discussed and was in consensus to raise the reward value for all big game and bald eagles to $500 across the board (R12-4-116. Reward Payments).

    The Commission discussed a waiting period for a person that has been drawn for big game and were not in agreement.

    Chairman Harris and Commissioner Mansell were not in favor of any waiting period except for a one year waiting period for youth only.


    Commissioner Davis was in favor of a one year waiting period for bull elk and a one year
    waiting period for youth, as well as removal of the 10% cap for nonresident javelina.


    Motion: Davis moved and Madden seconded THAT THE COMMISSION VOTE TO DIRECT
    THE DEPARTMENT TO BRING FORWARD A RULE PACKAGE THAT INCLUDES A
    ONE YEAR WAIT ON BULL ELK AND A ONE YEAR WAIT ON YOUTH AND A
    LIFTING OF THE NONRESIDENT CAP FOR JAVELINA.


    Vote: Aye - Davis, Madden

    Nay - Harris, Mansell

    Failed 2 to 2


    Motion: Harris moved and Mansell seconded THAT THE COMMISSION VOTE TO LIFT
    THE NONRESIDENT CAP FOR JAVELINA AND TO APPROVE A ONE YEAR WAITING
    PERIOD FOR YOUTH ONLY.

    Commissioner Davis clarified with Chairman Harris that the motion was for the Department to bring back some language and evaluation of the impact of a potential one year waiting period for youth only, and that this was for the report only and not a determination to implement at this point.


    Vote: Unanimous

    4 to 0

    Motion: Mansell moved and Madden seconded THAT THE COMMISSION VOTE TO
    APPROVE THE ARTICLE 1 FIVE-YEAR REVIEW REPORT FOR SUBMISSION TO THE
    GOVERNOR'S REGULATORY REVIEW COUNCIL AS PRESENTED AND DISCUSSED.

    Vote: Unanimous

    4 to 0

    * * * * *
    Last edited by WapitiBob; 03-02-2014 at 05:25 PM.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Blue Springs, MO
    Posts
    1,000
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 140 Times in 113 Posts
    Congratulations
    3
    Congratulated 24 Times in 2 Posts
    Interesting.. Further proof as to why the WY resident needs to avoid a preference point system at all costs... They can't help but to change the game every few years.

    Selfishly (this is always the case, and the inherent problem with point systems), I guess I like this, since as a lower point holder, it will give me opportunity, where before there was none. Unselfishly, I hate this... Nothing quite like screwing the guys that have been paying into your system for the last 15-20 years.
    My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    545
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 55 Times in 39 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Fink View Post
    Selfishly (this is always the case, and the inherent problem with point systems), I guess I like this, since as a lower point holder, it will give me opportunity, where before there was none. Unselfishly, I hate this... Nothing quite like screwing the guys that have been paying into your system for the last 15-20 years.
    Very well said. I guess a major problem with being a top point holder is that you are the minority by a huge margin. You have 100's or even 1,000's of pissed off people at the bottom of the point pole making a lot of noise about changing the system which screws the guys at the top.

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    3
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    It helps me since I'm not at the top. But it sucks for the guys that are at the top of the points game

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    177
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    It's a bummer when the rules change. I'm nervous for this in other states.

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Phoenix AZ
    Posts
    14
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Just curious, but do NRs have the same hard time drawing deer tags here?

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    North Umpqua River, Oregon
    Posts
    2,310
    Thanks
    402
    Thanked 491 Times in 307 Posts
    Congratulations
    40
    Congratulated 50 Times in 7 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by chasingAZelk View Post
    Just curious, but do NRs have the same hard time drawing deer tags here?
    Yeppers, particularly the high quality tags. If you are not in the max point pool you have virtually a 0% chance to draw an Arizona strip rifle tag as a non-resident, because all of the non-resident tags are gone in the max bonus point round of the draw.
    Grand Slam #1005 + 2: Dall (1986 Yukon), Fannin/Stone (1987 Yukon), Bighorn (1988 Colorado Unit S-26), Stone (1995 British Columbia), Desert (2001 Nevada Unit 161), Bighorn (2009 Wyoming Unit 5)

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    St. Charles, IL
    Posts
    380
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 18 Times in 13 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Keep in mind for all us AZ high point holders (I have as many as 18), the 20% pass rule was implemented long after we bought into the draw system. So it was a huge benefit that kicked in much later. Even this new proposal is better for top point holders than the original, as there will still be 50% basically preference tags. There were none when we bought in. So really nobody should be biatching about this. Just mending an inequity for all those buying in later. The main thing is the % of NR tags should still be about the same ~10%. It's a world away from SFW stealing NR tags to auction away and line DP's pockets!

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Phoenix AZ
    Posts
    14
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Ok well I kinda figure about the top units, but we have a California buddy who puts in with us(us being residents) We always get drawn...he is on the same app as us. Does he count for the NR pool?

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    545
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 55 Times in 39 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by chasingAZelk View Post
    Ok well I kinda figure about the top units, but we have a California buddy who puts in with us(us being residents) We always get drawn...he is on the same app as us. Does he count for the NR pool?
    Pretty sure you'll ALL be in the NR pool and subject to the 10% NR limit.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Arizona elk and antelope draw results soon!
    By Umpqua Hunter in forum Arizona
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-11-2014, 06:21 PM
  2. Arizona Draw odds?
    By kiddwinner in forum Arizona
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 03-02-2014, 11:41 AM
  3. Arizona & New Mexico Coues Draw - Looking for Info
    By cycloneshooter in forum Blacktail, Coues' and Whitetail
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-27-2014, 04:58 PM
  4. Arizona draw results are up!
    By nwwa huner in forum Mule Deer
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-19-2011, 05:56 PM
  5. Arizona Draw Results
    By Whitetail101 in forum Arizona
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-14-2011, 07:24 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •